Debs wrote:So how many Labour MPs are there in May's Brexit negotiating team?

The Tories instigated the referendum The Tories decided the 16 and 17 years olds would not get a vote because most of them would vote RemainThe 360 mill to the NHS a week was a Tory Whopper The decision to actually leave the EU is a Tory Party directive, not parliament, not will of the people, not national interest, just the right wing Tory Brexit Party looking out for it's own selfish interest. I suppose they feel very obliged to leave the EU after all that Russian money donated to Tory Party funds, and we all know the Kremlin wants the UK to isolate itself from the EU for the old divide and conquer plot. Hardly surprising we now have Russian made toxic chemical weapons unleashed upon UK mainland...

Labour has a substantial part of its "natural" vote in favour of Brexit, which is why the party has been all at sea in its response.

That's all we need; wide eyed looney National Socialists

A good part of the Leave vote was people who normally vote Labour not believing in the EU any more. Not sure if they have decided to become Nazis though!

Ben@Forest wrote: ... It's the most productive car plant in Europe and of course that's down to huge amount of investment mainly from Nissan. I think that pure economics is behind the reason. But they could build a more productive car plant anywhere given time - but unlikely to be Europe because wage costs would be as high, if not higher.

It used to be said that the US had air bases in the UK because it was like an aircraft carrier handy for Europe. I presume that, whatever the other advantages to Nissan of a plant here, being inside the EU tariff wall has been handy. At the mo, nobody in the govt., has the faintest idea what sort of trade deal we will have, if any.

As for wage costs in Europe, I was under the impression that plants in Spain, Romania and so on enjoyed a low wage economy.

A quick look shows Spain's average wage is about 200 euros a month less than ours (tho that makes no account for higher paying jobs generally), but it maybe that, as with France and Germany, firing workers is a harder proposition, and, sadly, employers like that flexibility.

As to Romania you're right about wage cost but it isn't central to the western European market, has poorer transport links, is in a more unstable part of the world and suffers from serious corruption (the 5th most corrupt in the EU - tho interestingly Italy is worse).

kwackers wrote:Why did I mention a PHD? Because I think that nobody can be an expert in something without a PHD? Not at all - except in this case the EU is so mind boggling complex that only a teeny tiny percentage of folk really have a clue and in order to have that much knowledge the chances are you'll have needed to have studied it for a fair amount of time

Since the referendum I have been reading the blogs and tweets of people with experience of the EU, trade negotiations and international law. From the outset they were raising issues that I hadn't heard from the government, Parliament or the mainstream media outlets, and they were predicting obstacles that time and time again have taken Tory Brexiters entirely by surprise.

We shouldn't take people seriously, who shift their principles with each emerging event, and whose arguments have retreated to the end of a cul-de-sac named "Belief". That's all they have left. The experts might be sometimes wrong, but they have reason and history on their side.

pwa wrote:There is no route back to the near consensus we once had, with the great majority accepting continued membership of the EU as inevitable. That has gone for good. If you wish us to stay in the best you should hope for is a long term divided society with a substantial minority eager to leave and voting accordingly. Labour voters are divided about this too, so it is not just a Tory issue.

Unless of course things go so badly in the next decade that near absolute poverty for many, a lack of workers to do the dirty jobs etc lead to more of a social breakdown than is the case at present.Demographic shift thrown in for good measure.Then such a consensus may re-establish perhaps?

I can see how that might happen in a decade or so if things play out as badly as you imagine. But at the moment there is a chasm between Leave and Remain with no hope of a coming together. If the UK voted again next year and voted to stay in, we would be even less pro-EU than we were a few years ago, and more unstable as a member.

I think the timing of the UK returning to EU membership will depend a lot on the type of Brexit and relationship we end-up with and how stable the Conservative Party is about that. I'm certain the UK will become a member again, just uncertain over timescales. i.e. if we have a sensible Brexit and remain in the Customs Union & Single Market I suspect a return to membership would be fairly quick (as those excluded from the referendum get to be allowed to vote and the older generation numbers decrease). But the hard Brexit the likes of the rabid Conservative extremists are seeking and a return to EU membership could be a long way off.

Similarly, if the Conservative Party come together around whatever deal is negotiated then we might not lose all trust (most but not all). But if the loons keep on their ideology about how terrible the ECJ is, how we have destroyed our democracy, etc. (basically about how we have not got the ideological Brexit they wanted) then the EU will recognise that the Conservatives will return to power (at some point) bringing with them all their madness and everything will start over again (demands to re-negotiate or leave (again) or break regulations (again), etc.) and there will be no trust.

PDQ Mobile wrote:Unless of course things go so badly in the next decade that near absolute poverty for many, a lack of workers to do the dirty jobs etc lead to more of a social breakdown than is the case at present.Demographic shift thrown in for good measure.Then such a consensus may re-establish perhaps?

I can see how that might happen in a decade or so if things play out as badly as you imagine. But at the moment there is a chasm between Leave and Remain with no hope of a coming together. If the UK voted again next year and voted to stay in, we would be even less pro-EU than we were a few years ago, and more unstable as a member.

I think the timing of the UK returning to EU membership will depend a lot on the type of Brexit and relationship we end-up with and how stable the Conservative Party is about that. I'm certain the UK will become a member again, just uncertain over timescales. i.e. if we have a sensible Brexit and remain in the Customs Union & Single Market I suspect a return to membership would be fairly quick (as those excluded from the referendum get to be allowed to vote and the older generation numbers decrease). But the hard Brexit the likes of the rabid Conservative extremists are seeking and a return to EU membership could be a long way off.

Similarly, if the Conservative Party come together around whatever deal is negotiated then we might not lose all trust (most but not all). But if the loons keep on their ideology about how terrible the ECJ is, how we have destroyed our democracy, etc. (basically about how we have not got the ideological Brexit they wanted) then the EU will recognise that the Conservatives will return to power (at some point) bringing with them all their madness and everything will start over again (demands to re-negotiate or leave (again) or break regulations (again), etc.) and there will be no trust.

Ian

At the risk of finding something to agree with you on, Ian, I can imagine circumstances under which I would consider voting for re-joining. Two things would have to have happened. Firstly, the EU would have remained a union of individual states and not continued centralising power. And secondly, the economies of the poorer states would have caught up sufficiently for migration pressures to have reduced.

bovlomov wrote: ... Since the referendum I have been reading the blogs and tweets of people with experience of the EU, trade negotiations and international law. From the outset they were raising issues that I hadn't heard from the government, Parliament or the mainstream media outlets, and they were predicting obstacles that time and time again have taken Tory Brexiters entirely by surprise. ...

All evidence of what devious people these €uropeans are and confirmation that the sooner we get them off our backs the better, although OTOH, why believe the predictions of R-e-m-o-a-n-er-s?

No matter what the outcome, it will be brilliant.

Meanwhile, in the Business section of today's Daily Telegraph, an article headlined:

These are some of the people - the brown ones - we've spent at least sixty years trying to keep out, and those who have turned elswehere for trading partners since we joined the Common Market, as was. Irrebuttable evidence we should never have joined, of course, but we had an In/Out referendum and the voice of the people was "In."

pwa wrote:At the risk of finding something to agree with you on, Ian, I can imagine circumstances under which I would consider voting for re-joining. Two things would have to have happened. Firstly, the EU would have remained a union of individual states and not continued centralising power. And secondly, the economies of the poorer states would have caught up sufficiently for migration pressures to have reduced.

Or Britain's economy has fallen and theirs risen so the two converge. Wonder if anyone you can remember a TV program called Auf Wiedersehen Pet where a group of mainly Geordie building workers had gone to Germany to find jobs? It wasn't uncommon in the eighties. If you're consistent you'll think that wrong as well - you obviously don't like them "coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" so the reverse should apply.

pwa wrote:At the risk of finding something to agree with you on, Ian, I can imagine circumstances under which I would consider voting for re-joining. Two things would have to have happened. Firstly, the EU would have remained a union of individual states and not continued centralising power. And secondly, the economies of the poorer states would have caught up sufficiently for migration pressures to have reduced.

Or Britain's economy has fallen and theirs risen so the two converge. Wonder if anyone you can remember a TV program called Auf Wiedersehen Pet where a group of mainly Geordie building workers had gone to Germany to find jobs? It wasn't uncommon in the eighties. If you're consistent you'll think that wrong as well - you obviously don't like them "coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" so the reverse should apply.

I do remember it. And I think numbers should be controlled, in both directions. And there is a difference between someone filling a temporary vacancy abroad for a few months and someone migrating permanently. It is a question of migration management, not of outright stopping. "Coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" is not how I would put it.

pwa wrote:At the risk of finding something to agree with you on, Ian, I can imagine circumstances under which I would consider voting for re-joining. Two things would have to have happened. Firstly, the EU would have remained a union of individual states and not continued centralising power. And secondly, the economies of the poorer states would have caught up sufficiently for migration pressures to have reduced.

Or Britain's economy has fallen and theirs risen so the two converge. Wonder if anyone you can remember a TV program called Auf Wiedersehen Pet where a group of mainly Geordie building workers had gone to Germany to find jobs? It wasn't uncommon in the eighties. If you're consistent you'll think that wrong as well - you obviously don't like them "coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" so the reverse should apply.

I do remember it. And I think numbers should be controlled, in both directions. And there is a difference between someone filling a temporary vacancy abroad for a few months and someone migrating permanently. It is a question of migration management, not of outright stopping. "Coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" is not how I would put it.

bovlomov wrote: ... Since the referendum I have been reading the blogs and tweets of people with experience of the EU, trade negotiations and international law. From the outset they were raising issues that I hadn't heard from the government, Parliament or the mainstream media outlets, and they were predicting obstacles that time and time again have taken Tory Brexiters entirely by surprise. ...

All evidence of what devious people these €uropeans are and confirmation that the sooner we get them off our backs the better, although OTOH, why believe the predictions of R-e-m-o-a-n-er-s?

No matter what the outcome, it will be brilliant.

Meanwhile, in the Business section of today's Daily Telegraph, an article headlined:

These are some of the people - the brown ones - we've spent at least sixty years trying to keep out, and those who have turned elswehere for trading partners since we joined the Common Market, as was. Irrebuttable evidence we should never have joined, of course, but we had an In/Out referendum and the voice of the people was "In."

Oh yes , of course everything anyone opposed to leaving the EU says is a lie and everything your Johnson, Farage, Gove and Rees-Mogg say is the absolute truth.Keep telling yourself that whatever outcome there is will be brilliant - you may even end up being convinced.

pete75 wrote:Or Britain's economy has fallen and theirs risen so the two converge. Wonder if anyone you can remember a TV program called Auf Wiedersehen Pet where a group of mainly Geordie building workers had gone to Germany to find jobs? It wasn't uncommon in the eighties. If you're consistent you'll think that wrong as well - you obviously don't like them "coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" so the reverse should apply.

I do remember it. And I think numbers should be controlled, in both directions. And there is a difference between someone filling a temporary vacancy abroad for a few months and someone migrating permanently. It is a question of migration management, not of outright stopping. "Coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" is not how I would put it.

No but it's what you mean isn't it?

No. I've never seen economic migrants as job thieves. If anything I admire their get-up-and-go approach. I just believe our government should limit inward migration so that it is closer to outward migration, and so that cheap migrant labour is not used to drive down the wages of those who are already poorly paid. Migration management. I don't see any individual stealing anyone else's job.

These are some of the people - the brown ones - we've spent at least sixty years trying to keep out, and those who have turned elswehere for trading partners since we joined the Common Market, as was. Irrebuttable evidence we should never have joined, of course, but we had an In/Out referendum and the voice of the people was "In."

Either because it will be a requirement of new trade deals, or simply because the economy needs immigrants, it seems probable that white European faces will be replaced by brown Asian ones. For those who voted Leave to reduce immigration, an increase in the more identifiable brown faces might be an unwelcome development.

pwa wrote:I do remember it. And I think numbers should be controlled, in both directions. And there is a difference between someone filling a temporary vacancy abroad for a few months and someone migrating permanently. It is a question of migration management, not of outright stopping. "Coming over 'ere and knicking our jobs" is not how I would put it.

No but it's what you mean isn't it?

No. I've never seen economic migrants as job thieves. If anything I admire their get-up-and-go approach. I just believe our government should limit inward migration so that it is closer to outward migration, and so that cheap migrant labour is not used to drive down the wages of those who are already poorly paid. Migration management. I don't see any individual stealing anyone else's job.

Yeah you admire their get up and go because that's exactly what you want them to do

In the are where I live there area lot of EU migrants working on teh land and in various processing jobs associated with agriculture. I have friends who employ them and they certainly want them to remain here. Most say they employ Eastern Europeans because they're better than the sort of British people who would work in the same jobs. One chap I know says they're generally intelligent, punctual, hard working , polite and friendly - good employees in other words. The sort of British people who go after the same jobs generally can't compete with those qualities -nothing to do with wages.

These are some of the people - the brown ones - we've spent at least sixty years trying to keep out, and those who have turned elswehere for trading partners since we joined the Common Market, as was. Irrebuttable evidence we should never have joined, of course, but we had an In/Out referendum and the voice of the people was "In."

Either because it will be a requirement of new trade deals, or simply because the economy needs immigrants, it seems probable that white European faces will be replaced by brown Asian ones. For those who voted Leave to reduce immigration, an increase in the more identifiable brown faces might be an unwelcome development.

I can see it causing apoplexy amongst certain posters here though already immigration from outside the EU higher than from within.